If you watch the Video, you can hear two words, We are flying in International Air space, we are operating under International Law ..

Click to expand...

When Chinese submarines dock somewhere in Sri Lanka, they are operating outside of India's territorial waters. However, India's concerns in those cases are valid. Similarly, Chinese concerns with the US needling thousands of miles away from the US is valid.

PRC claims that airspace as its own. US claims that it is international airspace. International Law is decided by who has the might to enforce it. If PRC can enforce its will, then that will be International Law. If the US can enforce its will, then that will be International Law.

I don't expect to see anything more than shadowboxing, and within a couple of decades, South China Sea will become de facto PRC's territorial waters, and the airspace, PRC's own airspace. They have already made progress with artificial islands in South China Sea.

When Chinese submarines dock somewhere in Sri Lanka, they are operating outside of India's territorial waters. However, India's concerns in those cases are valid. Similarly, Chinese concerns with the US needling thousands of miles away from the US is valid.

Click to expand...

As per Indian point of view, Irking China at anyway is an Benefit to India, just like why we field U2 and why we supported the CIA to operate from India to watch Chinese actions.

The interest being sure, China plans to expand his territory to newer Level, The south China sea, is for Phillipines, Vietnam and Taiwan, China with it's wealth can make Artificial Islands and patrols and makes It's Chinese Territory, even in the audio that chini guy shouting to the P 8. this is Chinese Navy go away from my air space,

It's someone's responsible to stop the Chinese aggression and teach a lesson, that anyone can show it's force. when you claim international waters as yours.

The Chinese SSN in Sri Lanka is noting but it's a threat to India, that India never bring this issue to International courts, rather make a friendly shout to Sri Lanka

PRC claims that airspace as its own. US claims that it is international airspace. International Law is decided by who has the might to enforce it. If PRC can enforce its will, then that will be International Law. If the US can enforce its will, then that will be International Law.

Click to expand...

Something like you can claim a empty govt land is yours..

I Think International Waters means anyone can fly or transport over there, but if anyone asks about your identity which means they are trying to control the region.

I don't expect to see anything more than shadowboxing, and within a couple of decades, South China Sea will become de facto PRC's territorial waters, and the airspace, PRC's own airspace. They have already made progress with artificial islands in South China Sea.

With all the buildup Chinese can exert the control firmly to back up our claim while P8 has to scramble all the way from Guam or Okinawa bases.

Other imagery taken in March also shows China could be building a second airstrip-capable island on Subi Reef.

China’s island building at Fiery Cross Reef has created a landmass that is capable of housing a runway about 3,000 m long. This would be well within the parameters of existing People’s Liberation Army Air Force runways on mainlandChina, which vary in length from about 2,700 m to 4,000 m at most.

The runway at Woody Island in the Paracel Islands was about 2,300 m before upgrade work started there in 2014; satellite imagery suggests China is also expanding that to be about 3,000 m long.

The 23 March imagery of Fiery Cross Reef also shows further dredging on the new island’s southwestern side, close to the extant platform that China originally built on the reef. The imagery also shows floating cranes consolidating the integrity of new island’s harbour by placing concrete blocks on the interior walls; an exterior sea wall has also been extended, presumably to provide better protection for ships in port.

As per Indian point of view, Irking China at anyway is an Benefit to India, just like why we field U2 and why we supported the CIA to operate from India to watch Chinese actions.

The interest being sure, China plans to expand his territory to newer Level, The south China sea, is for Phillipines, Vietnam and Taiwan, China with it's wealth can make Artificial Islands and patrols and makes It's Chinese Territory, even in the audio that chini guy shouting to the P 8. this is Chinese Navy go away from my air space,

It's someone's responsible to stop the Chinese aggression and teach a lesson, that anyone can show it's force. when you claim international waters as yours.

The Chinese SSN in Sri Lanka is noting but it's a threat to India, that India never bring this issue to International courts, rather make a friendly shout to Sri Lanka

Something like you can claim a empty govt land is yours..

I Think International Waters means anyone can fly or transport over there, but if anyone asks about your identity which means they are trying to control the region.

International waters, outside Chinese EEZ

Click to expand...

learn something called objectivity from pmaitra.

given the rivalry between China and India, what Americans are doing is also in the interest of India, but that doesnt mean American 's interference is morally justified.

you dont have to create moral high ground for the Americans and paint China as the bad guy.

your support for Americans is well justified by the rivalry between we two countries.

to put it straight, you support America simply because we are enemies, not because Americans are serving the justice.

given the rivalry between China and India, what Americans are doing is also in the interest of India, but that doesnt mean American 's interference is morally justified.

you dont have to create moral high ground for the Americans and paint China as the bad guy.

your support for Americans is well justified by the rivalry between we two countries.

to put it straight, you support America simply because we are enemies, not because Americans are serving the justice.

来自我的 HUAWEI P7-L07 上的 Tapatalk

Click to expand...

I personally don't care what china does to SCS little countries/japan.
I don't want china to control the same system of global shipping routes that it used for it's development to halt others.
There is no hate, only self interest. China is one of the few places in the world with real culture. Not possible to hate china for essentially political problems

The idea that the US may send military aircraft and ships to assert freedom of navigation around Chinese claimed islands in the South China Sea is seriously bad. It’s bad because it would involve an unreasonably assertive interpretation of the international law of the sea, and because it shows such little regard for the impact of such action on regional stability.

There are three main implications of the US proposal that concern the law of the sea. The first is the status of China’s claims to the disputed islands. A recent authoritative report from the Center for Naval Analyses in Washington concluded that while Vietnam may have a better claim to both the Spratlys and the Paracels, ‘[a]t the same time, U.S. policymakers cannot lose sight of the fact that China’s claims may be superior’, and that ‘[t]he absence of an unambiguous legal case in any of these disputes reinforces the wisdom of the U.S. policy of not taking a position regarding which country’s sovereignty claim is superior.’ The action now being contemplated can only be seen as an indication that in fact the US has taken a position on the sovereignty claims.

The second issue is the oft-stated line from Washington that China threatens the freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. But what freedoms of navigation are being threatened? China has always said that with freedoms of navigation and overflight, it only disputes the right of the US to conduct military activities, particularly certain types of intelligence collection and military data gathering (so-called ‘military surveys’) in its exclusive economic zone (EEZ). China’s disputation of the right of the US to undertake these activities isn’t without merit, particularly when the military surveys constitute marine scientific research which is under the jurisdiction of the coastal State in its EEZ. Also, it’s significant that several other regional countries, India, Malaysia and Thailand, share China’s position on military activities in the EEZ.

Washington then aggravates the situation by referring to the waters of the South China Sea as ‘international waters’, ignoring the reality that these waters are actually the EEZs of the bordering countries, including China. It also ignores the fact that the high seas freedoms of navigation and overflight available to other countries in these waters shall be exercised with what UNCLOS calls ‘due regard’ to the rights and duties of the relevant coastal State. The freedoms of navigation being claimed by the US in the South China Sea aren’t absolute and have to be exercised with ‘due regard’ to the rights of coastal States. For the US now to be claiming them appears as though it’s ignoring the sui generis nature of the EEZ established by UNCLOS.

The last law of the sea issue arises from reports that the options being considered in Washington include sending aircraft and ships within 12 nautical miles of the reefs and islands occupied by China. This would be an exercise of the right of innocent passage available through the territorial sea. Even though the features may not be full ‘islands’ under UNCLOS, they have a territorial sea. Sending ships and aircraft into such waters specifically for demonstrating a right wouldn’t be a legitimate exercise of innocent passage. UNCLOS makes clear that innocent passage should be ‘continuous and expeditious’, and shouldn’t involve ‘any threat or use of force against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of the coastal State.’

For all these reasons, the action contemplated by the US looks like a dangerously unilateral assertion of rights by Washington. What’s even more worrying is that the US, as a non-party to UNCLOS, may be ignoring some of the convention’s carefully balanced outcomes between the rights of coastal States and those of major maritime powers.

In even contemplating such an assertion of rights in the South China Sea, it appears the US has given little consideration to the impact on regional stability. Provoking China in such an aggressive and unnecessary manner can only make the current situation worse. One wonders whether the US knows what it’s doing in the South China Sea. Is it propping up its treaty partner, the Philippines, or is it asserting its own interests vis-à-vis those of China? Does it know its own limitations when it comes to following through on it its actions? Is it thinking of the consequences? Does it have any idea of an endgame in the South China Sea? These are all vexed questions the answers to which are far from clear.

What does all this mean for Australia? Basically, it means we should keep well clear of what the US is contemplating, including joining Washington in these protests against China.

AuthorSam Bateman is a professorial research fellow at the Australian National Centre for Ocean Resources and Security (ANCORS), University of Wollongong, and also an adviser to the Maritime Security Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. Image courtesy of Flickr user Official US Navy Page.

I personally don't care what china does to SCS little countries/japan.
I don't want china to control the same system of global shipping routes that it used for it's development to halt others.
There is no hate, only self interest. China is one of the few places in the world with real culture. Not possible to hate china for essentially political problems

Click to expand...

I get your point. But aside from Obama Admin scaremongering, has the Chinese millitary ever denied freedom of navigation to comercial shipping?

US media and the US State Dept are always noting that trillions of $'s pass through the SCS annually; but they always fail to mention that most of that is CHINESE GOODS on Chinese vessels. Why would China impede transit through the SCS when it has never done so before?

As the above article notes, the only "free navigation" China takes issue with are the constant US millitary surveilance missions within China's EEZ and around Chinese naval bases.

India controls sea lanes that pass near its territory. Japan intercepts any millitary flights anywhere near its coast, even through international airspace over the Miyako straits.

I get your point. But aside from Obama Admin scaremongering, has the Chinese millitary ever denied freedom of navigation to comercial shipping?

US media and the US State Dept are always noting that trillions of $'s pass through the SCS annually; but they always fail to mention that most of that is CHINESE GOODS on Chinese vessels. Why would China impede transit through the SCS when it has never done so before?

As the above article notes, the only "free navigation" China takes issue with are the constant US millitary surveilance missions within China's EEZ and around Chinese naval bases.

India controls sea lanes that pass near its territory. Japan intercepts any millitary flights anywhere near its coast, even through international airspace over the Miyako straits.

Click to expand...

fair enough .............. but china does what is probably most frighting... handing nukes to islamists.... not good PR in anyones eyes.

Yeah we need to learn how China's moral standards change quickly according to their liking.China stalls India's move on Salahuddin: Officials
This is not about enemy's enemy is my friend, this is about a guy intent on killing Indian civilians and China stalling a resolution from recognizing him as a threat, where are your morals now?